₦airaland Forum

I don't necessarily agree with the OP on all his conclusions...

But what will a typical woman do if she sees one of those signs in her lover?

Leave him?

davien:
And according to your brand of religion this attribute was their "design"...to kill anything else living on sight...
Linking satanism and atheism as though they represent the same clade is willfully dishonest of you.....
Atheists do not deny the existence of a creator/creators...as no such things as a "creator/creators" have ever been established from the onset.
It is the unvalidated claims of the existence of a "creator/creators" that is rejected..until such claims can be justified...
And simply because of this skepticism towards your theistic claims you've tagged atheists as "human hyena's" who you claim want to be free from the "shackles of reason and conscious morality"...
And yet these atheists that you claim want to be free from "reason and conscious morality" didn't fly that plane into the world trade centre, nor instituted a "holy crusade" to wipe out all heretics, nor restrained peoples rights.
It is a person like yourself who would claim a moral standard on issues and yet cannot differentiate when something is good from evil just because it was written to have been done by your "god" ...

Atheists in Soviet Union killed millions in their bid to stamp out religion.

Atheists in North Korea and China continue to do the same today.

The crusades wasn't to wipe out heretics. It was to primarily defend Christians.

I guess if there was a crusade against ISIS today, satanists like you would claim 1000 years from now that it was to wipe out heretics...just to discredit the Church.

AlfaSeltzer:
You want me to admit to the idea of a creator? if it makes you happy. But I can only show people that believe the creation nonsense the reality of creatures. A reasonable person cannot associate the idea of a compassionate loving god with the realities of its creation. But then, if xtians were reasonable, there wouldn't be xtians.

You're still saying God probably created the world but he is not loving and compassionate?

I'd just take it you have the wrong idea of "compassion" and "love."

shdemidemi:
There is a base, which is Christ, that can't be wrong.His promises concerning my soul and the souls of christiaians is also certain because God is forever faithful to His word. When I say no one can exhaust scripture it means we keep growing from one level of glory to a better degree of God's glory. Growth is constant, no man can have the perfect understanding of God hence growth in the Word is also constant. However there is always room for broader understanding of God's word.

Bottom line is that you're unsure of your understanding. You admitted this much by saying you abandon your teaching when you find it to be wrong.

So you shouldn't be teaching your fallible opinions as God's truths...you are toying with souls.

shdemidemi:
What Paul said orally isn't different from that which he says in his letters, it is from the same source. What was written was recorded for us today for our edification, if we needed to hear all that was said orally God wouldn't forget to include it in the bible.

What Paul said was sometimes different from what he wrote. Why would he travel long distances...e.g to Corinth, only to recite the same letter he had sent earlier to them. St. Paul was not stupid.

If we didn't need oral tradition, God would not have said we should hold fast to it in 2Thess2:15. But he did...which means we need it.
I never said the Holy Spirit cannot inspire anybody. I said there is no need for any more foundation to be laid according to scriptures, since that had been taken care of by the Apostles.[/quote]Then why are you here teaching...when the apostles have taught by word of mouth and letter?

shdemidemi:
Who is Mark and Luke??

Who is an Apostle?

Don't you think if Epaphroditus, Barnabas, Andronicus and Junais are called Apostles, Mark and Luke will loosely pass to be called that. They were definitely inspired to pen down the record of what they had seen.

So is it impossible for the Holy Spirit to raise new apostles to write scripture today?

shdemidemi:
This statement was not upon Peter but upon Simon- THE ONE WHO HEARS. Upon the WORD that Jesus is the son of God, A people were separated. Theses people remained an authority within the confines of the Word and not aside the word.

God said "The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth." "The gates of hell will not prevail against you."

You say the Church can be apostate with falsehood.

You're contradicting God.

shdemidemi:
Which rock? upon Peter?

The same Peter that was told this immediately after-
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

That's besides the point. Jesus gave us the Church. You say he didnt.

Matt16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

shdemidemi:
I never said He gave bible. He gave His Word through the Holy Spirit.

Oh! Jesus didn't give the Bible, yet you say the Bible is all the authority we need. Who then gave us the Bible, when was it given, and when did it become the authority for Christianity?

shdemidemi:
Whose word?

could it be my word, your word or Timothy's word or some other?

Bottom line is that St. Paul says hold fast to word of mouth...you say disregard word of mouth.

Yours is a false teaching.

vooks:
We know the authors NOT from traditions but from HISTORY. We don't know who was Nero's wife from the epistles but we know from HISTORY. Do you know the difference between tradition and history?
The Bible does not carry ALL available information in the world but it has ALL a true believer needs.

You're even debunking your own claim.

So the Bible is not all the authority we need, because without 'history,' you dont even know if the Bible was written by apostles or devil worshippers.

History, then, has become an authority for you.

Can you show me where history says that Mark and Luke were written by Mark and Luke?

Can you also tell me why you believe the historians are infallible?

*note that I dont agree we know from history, rather tradition. History is researched, tradition is handed down. You didnt research the authorship of those books, it was handed to you. But pls answer the questions above

shdemidemi:
If this is what you sincerely want to do, do it without retrogressing to insults I beg you.

Please show me where I insulted you. If I think you're teaching falsehood, can I not call you "false teacher?"

vooks:
Watch the video and stick to the subject of the thread otherwise you are spamming
There is time and place to prop fickle Catholicism and this is not it.
One word. Name a single first century tradition not found in the New Testament

You're obviously avoiding something.

Anyway...who are the writers of Mark and Luke?

It was nowhere written in the gospels...but the early Church knew by Tradition and passed it down.

The Bible is not all the authority we need.

vooks:
And you can't name ANY tradition Paul communicated to Timothy outside what is recorded in the epistles. Question then is, WHEN did we start collating non-epistle TRADITIONS? First,second third century?

The TRADITIONS theory was invented by catholicism to justify doctrines that are completely strange to scriptures

Allow me to ignore you.

I want someone I can reason with, not just someone who wants to out-shout another.

oluwalfa:
that no intelligent, compassionate, omnipotent being created such horror.

So such horror could have been created by a being not intelligent, compassionate and omnipotent?

That's okay for me.

I'll just take it you have the wrong idea of "compassionate, intelligent, omnipotent."

shdemidemi:
Oral tradition here means Timothy was informed about Christ and His body by Paul through words of mouth. What Timothy cannot do is to make up oral traditions of his own to be followed. That will be tantamount to supplanting God's word with something else.

No need for name calling, we can debate without resorting to that.

You said the Bible is all the authority we need.

That is a lie because Timothy, and by extension, we, need Tradition that isn't written.

shdemidemi:
Your assumption is wrong. I constantly study scriptures to learn more, because no one can exhaust scripture. If I hear a thing or see a thing that contradict what I think or believe in scripture, I completely debunk what I thought it was. SCRIPTURE REMAINS THE AUTHORITY.

Since you haven't studied and become selfless enough, it is a possibility that you are wrong in your interpretation. How can you then be teaching others what you're unsure of? So you teach something as God's truth today, only to find out tomorrow that it was wrong. By so doing, you endanger the souls of others.

Isn't that a foolish thing to do?

shdemidemi:
I believe what Paul said about the issue is sufficient. Stay within that which you have been taught, any swerve to the left or right is an adulteration of God's word.

But we are staying within what we have been taught by oral tradition and by letter, as St. Paul advised. The problem is when false teachers like you tell us to abandon tradition and hold fast to letter alone, in contradiction to St. Paul's words.

shdemidemi:
The Holy Spirit used the Apostles as foundations to the gospel. Such privilege isn't available to us as there is no more foundation to be laid asides that which had already been laid.

So according to you, the Holy Spirit cannot inspire a non-apostle to write scripture. Who then inspired Mark and Luke? The evil spirit?

shdemidemi:
No. They are equal.

But when I asked what you meant by scripture, you said: "More importantly the doctrine and teachings of Apostle Paul to the church."

Which should we take? Are they equal or St. Paul's teachings are more important in scripture than those of Jesus?

shdemidemi:
The church can well be devoid of the truth. When they add or take out from the WORD, they are no more a church but a group of apostates. What defines a church is the Word(Christ) and not the building or the people.

You're contradicting God. God said "The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth." "The gates of hell will not prevail against you."

You are suggesting the opposite. You're a false teacher.

shdemidemi:
Jesus did no give us a church, He gave us Himself which is the WORD.

He gave us all things through His Spirit that taught us all things that pertains to life.

18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Show me where Jesus gave us the Bible.

You're a false teacher.

shdemidemi:
Whose word was Paul referring to? Could it be a word concocted by Timothy? Remember he had told him to say only what he had been taught.

What letter was he referring to?

Moreover, he said the oral words and letters that were written and not the ones you will write to yourselves and for yourselves.

Bottom line is "word of mouth." The Bible (written letter) is not all the authority we need.

shdemidemi:
No, it is the same with Paul because I am following the words of Paul just as Paul followed Christ.

1 Corinthians 11 King James Version (KJV)

11 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Lies! Paul says "word of mouth," you say 'no word of mouth.'

You're a false teacher.

vooks:
He means if you removed Catholicism shades the Word would illuminate your spirit like you have never seen

Go figure where it is written ALL SCRIPTURE IS INSPIRED

Why do we have 39 OT books and not 390?


Paul was Inspired by the same Holy Spirit who descended on Jesus. He can't possibly CONTRADICT what Jesus said

What is the Church? Roman Catholicism?

All you need is His Word not empty traditions of men



Can you quote ONE TRADITION taught by Paul by word and not by letter and give proof of the same practiced in the first century
You are those who twist his words to your damnation

If you want to answer my queries, so that we can reason together and see what is true and what is false, you're welcome.

But if you want to engage in comments that are irrelevant to the discussion, so that you can mask the error in your ways and hold on senselessly to them, then let me know so that I can ignore you.

Vooks, did you miss this ?

Why should you malign anyone when you claim anyone can start a "Church" and administer it as he is led by the Spirit.

Who are you to say that the Catholic Church and this prophet have a wrong understanding of the spirit?

When did God make you an authority over them?

What then is the solution for you protestants? Continuing in this rubbish?u missed this
Why should you malign anyone when you claim anyone can start a "Church" and administer it as he is led by the Spirit.

Who are you to say that the Catholic Church and this prophet have a wrong understanding of the spirit?

When did God make you an authority over them?

What then is the solution for you protestants? Continuing in this rubbish?

shdemidemi:
The bible through Paul said this to Timothy and by extension you and I-
2 Tim 3
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

[size=18pt]14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned[/size] and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

Paul never gave Timothy or you or me to add anything to what had been taught regardless of any spirit he might encounter. We have been charged to stay within the teachings and doctrines of scriptures.

Timothy learned things from Paul through oral tradition too.

Phil 4:9 Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard (not read) and seen (not read) in me, and the God of peace will be with you.

So clearly, the Bible is not all the authority we need.

You're a false teacher.

shdemidemi:
The bible means one thing, there is no private interpretation to it. If we study well enough and become selfless enough we will all arrive at the same interpretation.

Good. I assume you have studied and become selfless enough. So your interpretation is the correct one. Anyone who contradicts you does so because has not studied and become selfless enough, right?

shdemidemi:
We have a myriad of such portions by Apostle Paul.

Yet it is impossible to name where the Bible says "the Bible is all the authority we need?"

shdemidemi:
Never

Why can't more books be added to the Bible? Has the Holy Spirit lost the ability to inspire men to write scripture?

shdemidemi:
Just like the words of Jesus are not greater tan that of the father, the words of the son are not greater tan that of the the Spirit.

You're saying the words of Paul are more important than the words of Jesus. Yes or no?

shdemidemi:
the church is the pillar of truth because of her link to the word(Christ). Any church divulge of the Word is no more a church of Christ but something else.

You agree that the Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth. It means the Church cannot be devoid of the truth. That's why Jesus gave us the Church, he didn't give us the Bible. You're saying Jesus left us without giving us all the authority we need?

So it is a lie that the Bible is all the authority we need.

shdemidemi:
Yes.. as long as it is rightly divided.

St. Paul says no.

2Thess2:15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.

Your Christianity is different from that of Paul. You must have got yours from satan. Since the Holy Spirit cannot teach Paul one thing, and teach you another.

shdemidemi:
The book of the bible from Genesis to Revelation for an holistic view and for learning. More importantly the doctrine and teachings of Apostle Paul to the church.

1. You didnt tell us whose interpretation we should use to check what is scriptural or not. Please do.

2. Where (from Genesis to Revelation) is it written that the Bible is all the authority we need?

3. Can more books be added to this Bible? If not, why?

4. Apostle Paul's teachings are more important than that of Jesus?

5. Is the Bible the pillar and foundation of truth, according to Paul?

6. Should we hold fast to only what is written in the Bible, according to Paul?

vooks:
I second that.
Could you briefly explain why if at all believers need the Holy Spirit IN them if the scriptures are all authority we need

Where did scripture tell you that it is all the authority we need?

Do you believe that Christians must hold fast to both oral tradition and written word?

Is scripture the pillar and foundation of truth?

shdemidemi:
The scripture happen to be all of the authority we need. We can discern truth from false by checking similar or preceding examples in scripture. If any action draws no semblance to that which had been recorded, it must be unequivocally censured by true christians.

What do you mean by "scripture," Sir.

And whose interpretation of scripture should we use to check what is scriptural or not?

vooks:
Catholicism has had their fair share of idiocy including but not limited to persecuting Galileo. Facing Rome is not the solution

Why should you malign anyone when you claim anyone can start a "Church" and administer it as he is led by the Spirit.

Who are you to say that the Catholic Church and this prophet have a wrong understanding of the spirit?

When did God make you an authority over them?

What then is the solution for you protestants? Continuing in this rubbish?

AlfaSeltzer:
You miss the point totally.
Is your god also incapable of mercy? What was going through your god's head when he created animals that eat others alive? Couldn't your consciously merciful omni omni god devise another way for hyenas to feed? If African wild life was the best your omni god can do, how useless is he!

Still, what's your point?

Protestants!

Why are you maligning the "Prophet" when you claim anyone can interpret the Bible, open a "Church" and teach according to his interpretation.

The "prophet" is doing what 'God told him.'

When did God set you as an authority over him?

zeemahn:
When one man is mad-delusion
When many people are mad- religion
#mad theist
#You wish there is god
#but there isn't

You can as well worship gravity

You have no proof of what you said.

It is meaningless.

Try again.

striktlymi:
For some people, even if an Angel reveals the truth about Catholicism to them, they would still be adamant.

Yes. There are many like that.

After all God himself came down and lived in Israel...but look at Israel today. Unbelievers!

Weah96:
I'd rather worship the collective faeces deposited on earth daily, than that imaginary FEEL-GOOD, anything-goes, b)itch God in your head.

You have absolutely ZERO FEAR of your Chihuahua deity, why should I glorify your insanity with a modicum of respect?

You miss it.

I'm not asking you to respect me...or God. I'm asking you to respect yourself.

It's not us you're insulting. It's your self you're degrading to the level of lower beasts.

You don't deserve it. You're a human being with God-given dignity.

Be a man...you're not the first to be out thought on the internet.

Image123:
Different understanding is not opposition to church doctrine. There were brethren in the early church who had differing views on circumcision in Acts 15. They were brethren and so rightly referred to. But thankfully, the church came together to consider the matter, and God's gifts of apostles, teachers etc were able to come to an agreed teaching on the matter. That letter was sent to other BRETHREN who probably had different views on the subject. They were not false or another church. What they lacked was same understanding, knowledge and revelation.

After the Church made a definitive teaching on the issue, was opposition to the teaching tolerated...like you do in the guise of "different opinions?"

Image123:
Just so we are clear on this, i do not need to answer your questions. i have no such obligation or requirement. i'm not here to beg you or argue with you. How many contradictory positions can one get in whether Jesus Christ resurrected or not? Can we have millions of churches havng millions of teachings on whether Jesus resurrected or not? If you refuse to get that plain point, that is your business not mine.

The hundreds of thousands of Protestant communities and the millions of "non-denominational Christians" in the world have different contradictory doctrines. Yes or no?

Image123:
And who ratifies the catechism or canon law? Is the Roman Catholic church not currently confused and contradictory on whether gays should be priests or not, and on even evolution? Are those not contradictory doctrines/teachings? So, you are at liberty to hold personal opinions but other denominations are not at liberty to hold theirs? Theirs is millions of contradictory doctrine while yours is personal opinions liberty. Who is fooling who?

Here is the Catholic teaching concerning homosexuals and ordination:

In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question [9], cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture" [10].

[9] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church (editio typica, 1997), n. 2358; cf. also CIC, can. 208 and CCEO, can. 11.

[10] Cf. Congregation for Catholic Education, A memorandum to Bishops seeking advice in matters concerning homosexuality and candidates for admission to Seminary (9 July 1985); Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Letter (16 May 2002): Notitiae 38 (2002), 586.

On evolution, the Church teaches that, if evolution is true, it was/is ordered by God.

There is no confusion on Catholic doctrine. It is well documented. Sorry to disappoint you. You seem desperate to justify the contradictions and confusion in protestantism's doctrines by manufacturing contradictions for the Catholic Church.

Yes, I can hold personal opinions where the Catholic Church does not have a definitive teaching. That is allowed in Catholic teaching. But I cannot teach something contrary to what the Catholic Church has taught definitively. That would mean opposing the Holy Spirit who teaches through the Church.

In protestantism, you say that Christ Embassy is "church," yet it teaches that masturbation is not a sin and many protestants (so called members of the Church) teach the opposite.

And many more examples. By what spirit is the Church teaching opposite doctrines? Holy or evil?

Image123:
The Bible. The matters of redemption and eternal life are weighty and salient.

But all of Christian doctrine is about redemption and eternal life.

Why then do you say some issues are salient, and must not be disagreed on...while others are non salient and opposing them does not make one step outside the Church?

You cant show where the Bible makes such distinction. You are trying to impose your personal tradition as truth. No?

Image123:
Yes, like some sect of the catholic are likely false.

You mean God's visible Church can be false? Meaning God's Church can be run by the devil?

Are you thinking of what you're saying?

If the visible church can be false then how can we identify the true Church...since we all learnt what "Church" is from a visible entity...which could be false.

Weah96:
You're doing an EXCELLENT job on that end all by yourself.

Have you banged your pee hole God yet in his arse? Or did he send you out here to LIE and make a fool out of yourself again?

Hahaha. A wet Chihuahua is more ferocious than your homo deity.

Hey friend, I understand it's frustrating when someone demontrates how deficient and uninformed your reasoning is, but you dont have to make a mockery of yourself by going so low.

Get yourself together. Be a man.

zeemahn:

Ops attempt to prove made sense. Typical theist. Once they loose an argument from all angles, they resort to derogatory statements.
#I win

So he only 'attempted to prove'...but he failed to prove, because according to you "It is actually impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural being."

You're, in effect, saying the title of this thread is a lie.

#ConfusedAtheist

frank317:
According to italo not the Bible, Judas hung himself upside down

Lying cannot also help your frustration at not being able to prove the Bible wrong, sorry.

Weah96:
I never said it didn't exist. Show me where I said it didn't exist. Christian Liar.

italo:
I will show you when you show me where I said you "said" it never existed.
You're the liar and ignoramus.

Weah96:
"Oh! Inverted Hanging suddenly exists. Hours ago you thought it didnt."

It's clear you're the liar.

It's clear why you're lying...you're frustrated you can't prove the Bible wrong.

Weah96:
I never said it didn't exist. Show me where I said it didn't exist. Christian Liar.

I will show you when you show me where I said you "said" it never existed.

You're the liar and ignoramus.

Oh! Inverted Hanging suddenly exists. Hours ago you thought it didnt.

ignoramus.

Weah96:
You can't possibly be this stupid. Were you too f)cking dumb and lazy to READ your OWN LINK on inverted hanging?

It is a form of PUNISHMENT, dummy, not something someone does TO HIMSELF. #Halfwit